4 ms·

That doesn't answer the question though. Why not just add all (or some) of the aforementioned stuff to tmux? Tmux is an established, widely used piece of softwa

• ymse 11y ago
  You could say the same about screen vs tmux (or endless other software clones). Projects like these help drive innovation on both sides. Competition, if you like. Besides, Pymux is Python while tmux is C. I'm sure you can appreciate that adding a Python API to tmux would be non-trivial, both code-wise and politically.
  • JustSomeNobody 11y ago
    But what's the innovation? Adding the python API?
    • toolz 11y ago
      Not everything has to innovate. I understand it would be more useful to you and I if it did innovate, but there isn't some prereq for posting to hacker news that your project has to be innovative. I personally find this project interesting to see, although I won't be using it.
      • JustSomeNobody 11y ago
        The comment I was replying to specifically mentioned it.
        • hueving 11y ago
          Spend the 30 seconds required to read the ancestor comment explaining what it has enabled WRT prompt toolkit.
    • gnuvince 11y ago
      Look at the list of features that pymux has that tmux doesn't.
      • JustSomeNobody 11y ago
        That's innovative? Ok, for some loose def of innovation.
        • ta0967 11y ago
          you seem to have confused innovation with invention. but that's beside the point. you seem to think that software needs to be either to deserve existance. looks like you're in the minority with that opinion, the rest of us is quite happy with iterative, gradual improvement. we consider it better than sticking with whatever the first shot at an implementation managed to hit.
  • DannoHung 11y ago
    In my experience, Screen is a crashy piece of garbage. tmux is comparatively rock solid.
  • git-pull 11y ago
    Author of tmuxp here, a python API and config manager on top of tmux(1). You can see the quickstart at https://tmuxp.readthedocs.org/en/latest/quickstart_python.html https://tmuxp.readthedocs.org/en/latest/quickstart_python.ht... and the API documentation at https://tmuxp.readthedocs.org/en/latest/api.html https://tmuxp.readthedocs.org/en/latest/api.html. You can see the testcases we cover use real tmux sessions and monitor the state of the session / window / panes to assert the API functions correctly. https://github.com/tony/tmuxp/tree/master/tmuxp/testsuite https://github.com/tony/tmuxp/tree/master/tmuxp/testsuite As for pymux, Jonathan Slenders' work on ptpython [1] and prompt_toolkit have been quite nice when working with shell_plus in django or debugging python projects. He's good in this area. Agreed that it's a nice thing to have pymux there. And agreed that adding native language extensions (python, ruby, etc.) to tmux would be complicated code-wise and perhaps not in the spirit of what it aspires to be. That said, on the tmuxp side of things, a lot could be improved. For example, switching tmuxp to use control mode (-C) and filing smaller patches to expand control mode's events in tmux(1). [1] https://github.com/jonathanslenders/ptpython https://github.com/jonathanslenders/ptpython
• ossreality 11y ago
  Absurd. Created something admittedly slower and cloned all of the rest of tmux's core functionality. Could've spent a week groking the tmux source code base, another to add the fish features and then an extra week to drink on the beach. Instead, there are still months ahead meanwhile 99.999% of tmux users will continue using tmux.
• jzd 11y ago
  Because doing it in C might be a waste of time
  • melted 11y ago
    How so? You instantly get the benefits out to a huge user base.
    • jzd 11y ago
      Same goes for Python
• njharman 11y ago
  Pure Python is the difference. It runs anywhere python runs. Same can't be said for a compiled C program. It's maybe not a "big" why, or one you care about.
  • bch 11y ago
    I'm not following you -- are you saying that Python runs where C doesn't, or something else ?
    • njharman 11y ago
      I'm saying Python is already installed in places that would require a lot of effort to port and compile C vs just running some.py file. "python some.py" is (in some cases) vastly easier than porting/compiling/signing C code.
  • glesica 11y ago
    Isn't the Python interpreter implemented in C? How could Python run someplace that C can't?
    • deadbeef404 11y ago
      I think he means the exact same Python script can be run directly on any environment that has Python installed if written correctly, in contrast to a C program which has to be recompiled on various environments to be able to run.
    • wrenky 11y ago
      Python as a language is implemented on almost every platform out there- You can just take this source code and run it there, instead of compiling for the target hardware.
    • njharman 11y ago
      One of them is. And ability to interpret Python is requirement for any python program to be able to run. Being able to build and deploy a c lib is not. So, someone has made python run on Foo platform, lets say a watch. If I have a pure python program I can run it on that watch with no more fuss. If I have to rely on a c library then I have to get that ported to Foo platform, maybe dealing with developer keys and making "authorized" signed binary, etc, etc. Pure python is orders of magnitude easier. That is why "Pure Python" is a thing. Several standard libs come in pure python and C versions cause pure python is an advantage / requirement for some use cases. And speed is for others.
• foota 11y ago
  It literally does. "The big advantage of using Python and prompt_toolkit is that the implementation of new features becomes very easy."